But it would be nice to have a long term, competent back up QB. You know, a guy that wouldn't shit himself and is actually capable of winning games.

Absolutely.

The QB position on this team is so terrible that we have to throw numbers at the situation. I would have absolutely no problem with doing all three of the following:

1. Acquiring a legit "vet" option (such as a Flynn, whom I believe we could have for nominal cost if we're willing to take on the contract).
2. Drafting a QB whom we believe has franchise potential in the first, ideally. Definitely no later than the top of round two.
3. Throwing a late-round pick at a QB.

At the very least, we must accomplish two of the three above options.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by badgirl

If you met me in person and didn't know who I was you would never guess it was me.

I'll echo what a lot of you have said here. If any QB is worth taking in the top 15, why not take him at #1? I think we're all pretty much in agreement that the biggest need on this Chiefs team is a QB. True, there isn't a Luck or RG3 this year, but how many drats have such players? Not many, so man up and take the best QB available and move on. Not rocket science, folks.

I like Smith and I would like for him to separate himself and for us to take him at 1. The flip side of that argument however comes down to how good Smith really is in comparison to other players in the draft and the league.

If Smith is the clear cut best option available in both the draft and in free agency/trade, and everyone else is a severe fall off the cliff compared to him (IE Smith is Matt Stafford and the next guy is Blaine Gabbert) then you take Smith. But if you say that Smith is going to be kind of in the same boat as a lot of these other guys, or you can get a guy in a later round that you feel has the makeup to succeed, then is there a better player available?

For example, in hindsight it looks obvious, but in 2011 both Tennessee and JVille needed QB's and they identified Locker and Gabbert as top 10 worthy, and drafted them at 8 and 10 respectively. Meanwhile, JJ Watt go at 11, and Dalton and Kaepernick go in the second round.

So Dorsey has a lot of different angles he has to look at. Is Smith truly the best? Will he fit in with what we do here and thrive? Do we give big money to Albert or is Joekel a significant, potential All-Pro upgrade? Is there a defender that is a game changer at that pick? Can we trade down? Will there be a QB in round 2 that will be a better fit for Reid? Can we trade back into the first round and take a QB who might not be significantly different than Smith? Etc.

To me, if the answer is that Smith is by far the best QB available this year in the draft and free agency, and if there is no truly elite prospect in the draft, then the choice is simple. If Dorsey doesn't see much difference between Smith and Joekel talent wise, IE they both have upside but both have some warts, and elects to go with Joekel just because he is a "safer" pick, then that to me is like Jake Long over Matt Ryan, which is a mistake...

No disrespect but, what blows my mind is the way some of you think he is the best thing since Jesus. I like him but man, people are Geno crazy around here. It's like they love him so much that they just want to grab hold of him and **** the shit out of him. It's kind of weird. I know these are desperate times for Chiefs fans but, there are a ton of fans wearing beer goggles. He's a good prospect who hasn't done shit and that's about it.

It really is this simple....You don't have a QB, you take a shot, draft and develop the best one available at that spot. Fail....Try again.

The QB position on this team is so terrible that we have to throw numbers at the situation. I would have absolutely no problem with doing all three of the following:

1. Acquiring a legit "vet" option (such as a Flynn, whom I believe we could have for nominal cost if we're willing to take on the contract).
2. Drafting a QB whom we believe has franchise potential in the first, ideally. Definitely no later than the top of round two.
3. Throwing a late-round pick at a QB.

At the very least, we must accomplish two of the three above options.

I'll take all three, i've advocated for your well said "throw numbers at it" proposition many times.

There is almost NOTHING that should be considered over the top in the search for a bona-fide player at that position.

Exactly, teams are not on the hook with these draft picks anymore like they used to be. The reward highly outweighs the risk, where as a few years ago you better not miss.

That and guys are coming into the league better prepared and ready to play right away. You can compete, win games right away and that's not talking about guys like Luck and RG. It's ones like Dalton, Flacco, and Wilson.

That and guys are coming into the league better prepared and ready to play right away. You can compete, win games right away and that's not talking about guys like Luck and RG. It's ones like Dalton, Flacco, and Wilson.

Even when they're super raw, teams are figuring out ways to use them. See Ryan Tannehill.

For the guys who don't want to draft Geno #1, where/who do we get who's better? If we don't draft a QB #1 it's because we sign or trade for someone better? Who is it?

Fact is we have to go into the season with the best QB possible. I'm OK with signing a veteran also as long as we get Geno. Geno might need time to work on the mechanics and mental reps of this style. Go into the season with the safety plan, but if Geno shows he's ready during Pre-Season then start him day one.